\documentclass{watercrystal}%[twocolumn]
% \punctstyle{quanjiao}
% \defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}
% \setCJKmainfont[AutoFakeBold=false,ItalicFont=FandolKai]{FandolSong}
% \setCJKsansfont[AutoFakeBold=false]{FandolHei}
% \setCJKmonofont{FandolFang}

\title{远程意念作用对水结晶形成的影响：三盲重复实验
    \thanks{【译注】本文是论文《Effects of Distant Intention on Water Crystal Formation: A Triple-Blind Replication》一文的中文翻译。}}

\author[1]{\textsc{Dean Radin} 博士
    \thanks{\kaishu 本文通讯作者。联系方式：美国加利福尼亚州，佩塔卢马市，圣安东尼奥路101号，邮政编码：94952。电子邮箱：dean@neotic.org}}
\author[1]{\textsc{Nancy Lund}}
\author[2]{江本胜(\textsc{Masaru Emoto})}
\author[2]{\textsc{Takashige Kizu}
    \thanks{【译注】高重木津，IHM研究员，江本胜先生的助手}}
\affil[1]{美国，加利福尼亚州，佩塔卢马，思维科学研究所}
\affil[2]{日本，东京，IHM研究所}

\date{}

\begin{document}
\maketitle
\vspace{-36pt}
% \setcounter{page}{408}

\begin{abstract}
% Abstract—An experiment tested the hypothesis that water exposed to distant intentions affects the aesthetic rating of ice crystals formed from that water. Over three days, 1,900 people in Austria and Germany focused their intentions towards water samples located inside an electromagnetically shielded room in California. Water samples located near the target water, but unknown to the people providing intentions, acted as “proximal” controls. Other samples located outside the shielded room acted as distant controls.
本实验对“远距离意念可以影响水使其结晶的几何形状和美观程度发生改变”这一假说进行了检验。在三天的时间里，来自奥地利和德国的1900人对位于美国加利福尼亚州一间电磁屏蔽室中的水样本施以远距离意念。施加远程意念的人们并不知道在目标水样本附近放置了另一组水样作为“近端”对照组。还有一组水样本位于屏蔽室外，作为远端对照组。

% Ice drops formed from samples of water in the different treatment conditions were photographed by a technician, each image was assessed for aesthetic beauty by over 2,500 independent judges, and the resulting data were analyzed, all by individuals blind with respect to the underlying treatment conditions.

不同对照组水样本的冰晶由技术人员进行拍照后，所得的照片由超过2500名评分者独立地进行美学上的评价，产生的评分数据由相关人员进行了分析，这些人员都不知道样本组相应的实验条件。

% Results suggested that crystal images in the intentionally treated condition were rated as aesthetically more beautiful than proximal control crystals (p = 0.03, one-tailed). This outcome replicates the results of an earlier pilot test.

评分结果表明，与近端对照组相比，由意念处理过的水样产生的结晶图象更加优美（p=0.03，单尾检验）。这一结论与早期初步实验得出的结论相符。\\
\par\par
\noindent \textbf{关键词：}意念；水；意识；
\end{abstract}


% 首先，我们可以通过这个网页初步了解什么是双盲，什么是三盲：
% http://www.guokr.com/post/392467/
% 以下为正题。
% Keywords: intention—water—consciousness

\section{引言}

% Can one person’s intention affect another person’s health from a distance? A growing number of clinical studies have investigated this question. Some of them provide positive evidence（1）, others do not（2）. To help study this question under more stringent laboratory controls, investigators have also explored whether one person’s intention can affect another person’s nervous system from a distance（3）. From those studies the evidence is clearer. From a meta-analytic perspective the original question can be answered with a tentative yes（4）. Tentative, because while the evidence is statistically significant and repeatable, the observed effects are small in magnitude, nontrivial to replicate, and theoretical explanations remain speculative.（5）

一个人的意念可以从远处影响其他人的健康吗？这个问题正在吸引人们进行越来越多的临床研究。有些临床研究证据支持该说法\cite{Sicher1998A, Astin2000The}，有些则没有\cite{Astin2006The, Harkness2000A, Aviles2001Intercessory, Palmer2004A, Krucoff2005Music, Bensona2006Study}。为了使对该问题的研究在更严格的实验条件下进行，研究人员还探索了一个人的意念是否会远距离影响另一个人的神经系统\cite{Radin2004Event, Wackermann2003Correlations, Achterberg2005Evidence, Richards2005Replicable, Standish2003Evidence, Standish2004Electroencephalographic}。通过这些研究，证据更加明显。从元分析\footnote{【译注】即对现有研究工作进行调研、分析归纳和总结。}的角度，我们可以对原始问题做出试探性的肯定回答\cite{Schmidt2004Distant}。之所以是试探性的回答，是因为虽然这些证据在统计上显著且可重复实验的，但观察到的效应幅度很小，重复试验的代价很高，且理论解释在某种程度上还只是个推测\cite{Walach2005The, Walach2005Generalized, Radin2006Entangled}。

% Because of the complexities associated with studying human health and physiological responses, still other investigators have aimed towards further simplification by asking whether intention affects properties of water. This remains relevant to the question about health because the human body consists of 70% to 90% water, depending on age.（6） Evidence from those studies supports the hypothesis that intention affects properties of water（7）, but like many of the empirical studies in this domain, most of the experimental reports have appeared in specialty journals and have gone unnoticed by most medical researchers.

由于研究人类健康和相关生理反应极其复杂，很多研究者试图进行简化性的研究，即意念是否会影响水的性质。这点仍与研究人类健康的方向相关，因为随着人年龄的不同，人体内的水含量在70\%到90\%之间变化\cite{Sheng1979A}。这些实验的证据表明意念能改变水的性质\cite{Schwartz1990Infrared, Roneydougal2002Field, Lenington1979Effect}，但正如这个领域内的其它许多实证研究一样，它们虽然发表在专业的期刊上，却被大多数医学研究者忽略。

% One exception that has elevated the question about intention and water from the obscure to the infamous is the claim that water exposed to or “treated” by positive intentions results in frozen water crystals that are aesthetically more pleasing than similar crystals formed from “untreated” water（8）. In an earlier pilot experiment we tested this claim under double-blind conditions and found evidence in favor of the “intentional hypothesis” (p=0.001).（9） The present study was a replication attempt conducted under triple-blind conditions.

不过这里有一个例外——有观点认为“受到积极意念影响的水形成的结晶比没有受到意念影响的水形成的结晶在美学方面更加美观”\cite{Masaru2004Healing, Emoto2005THE}——这使得“意念与水”相关的研究从默默无名到“臭名昭著”。在早期初步实验中，我们在双盲条件下重复了这个实验，并发现结论更支持“意念假说”(p=0.001)\cite{Radin2006Double}。本研究是在三盲条件下对此实验的重复再现。



\section{方法}
\subsection{水实验样品制备}
% 在实验准备阶段，第二作者（GH ）购买了四瓶“斐济”牌商用塑料瓶装水（购买地点：洛杉矶，加利福尼亚州） 。之所以选择该品牌是因为，去除掉斐济标签后，塑料瓶不含任何文字，符号或是浮雕在塑料表面的形状，这与其他品牌的瓶装水不同。第一作者（ DR）把瓶子随机用A到D来标记（用掷骰子的方法） ，并在GH的监督下，他随机选择了其中的两个瓶子作为“处理”的样品（在本次实验中选择的是A和B），剩下的两瓶分别预留作为对照组（C和D）。

% 等待被意念“处理”的瓶子放置在加利福尼亚州Petaluma的思维科学研究所（IONS）一个有双层钢制外壁的电磁屏蔽室（【这应该是个地址】81，林格伦/ETS，德克萨斯州Cedar Park ）。这间屋子主要用于在远程“意念处理”期间放置瓶子（较方便，而且限制其他人在此期间进入）。对照组的瓶子放置在单独的纸箱里，并存放在屏蔽室所在大楼另一层的一个安静位置的一张桌子上。D.R.和G.H.没有通知第三或第四作者（ ME或TK）关于对照组的存在，直到“处理”完成后。

% In preparation for the experiment, the first author (D.R.) purchased six plastic bottles of Fiji brand commercial bottled water, the same type of water used in the pilot study. D.R. randomly assigned (using a tossed die) the bottles with labels A through F, and then the second author (N.L.) took the bottles to the laboratory and randomly selected (again with a tossed die) two bottles as the treated samples, two as “proximal” controls, and two as “distant” controls.

在实验准备阶段，第一作者（D.R.）购买了六瓶“Fiji”牌商用塑料瓶装水，这与之前实验一致。D.R.随机给这六瓶水贴上A-F的标签（用掷骰子的方法），然后第二作者（N.L.）将这些水带入实验室，并用骰子随机选择两瓶水为实验组的样本，两瓶水为近端对照组，剩下两瓶水为远端对照组。

% N.L. noted the resulting assignments and placed two copies in separate envelopes which remained sealed until after the analyses were completed.（10） She retained one envelope and the other was stored in D.R.’s desk. Then she entered a double steel-walled, electromagnetically shielded room (Lindgren/ETS, Cedar Park, Texas, Series 81 Solid Cell chamber) at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) in Petaluma, California, where she placed the two treatment bottles on top of a small table and the two proximal control bottles under that table. The shielded room acted as a convenient, limited-access location in which to leave the bottles during the experiment.

N.L.将六瓶水的标签分配信息记录两份，分别放在不同的信封中，这些信封只有当数据分析工作完成后才能启封%\footnote{The analysis reported here differs from the original plan in response to a reviewer’s comments, so an argument could be made that this study, as reported, is actually double-blind.}
。其中一个信封由她保留，另一个信封放在D.R.的办公桌内。接下来，她进入加利福尼亚州Petaluma思维科学研究所（ Institute of Noetic Sciences，IONS）的电磁屏蔽室（这个房间具有双层钢结构的墙壁设计，能起到电磁隔离的效果。具体位置：Lindgren/ETS, Cedar Park, Texas, Series 81 Solid Cell chamber）。在这个房间中，她将两瓶实验组样本放在小桌子上，将两瓶近端对照组的水放在桌子下。这个电磁屏蔽室用于在实验期间放置瓶子（在此期间限制其他人进出）。

% N.L. then took a digital photo of the treatment and proximal control bottles, and placed the two remaining bottles (distant controls) in a Styrofoam box and stored them on top of a bookshelf on another floor of the laboratory building. D.R. edited the digital photo of the bottles in the shielded chamber to reveal just the two treatment bottles, then emailed the photo to M.E. and T.K. They used this photo as a visual aid for three groups that would later direct their intentions towards those bottles.

然后，N.L.对实验组和近端对照组的瓶子进行拍照，并将剩下的两个远端对照组的瓶子放在聚苯乙烯泡沫塑料箱内，箱子放在实验室大楼另外一层的书架顶端。D.R.在这个房间内编辑这些瓶子的照片，只留下了实验组的照片，并将照片通过电子邮件发给第三作者和第四作者（M.E.和T.K.）。他们将用这些照片作为视觉辅助，帮助实验中另外三组人员将他们的意念施加到这些瓶中的水样上。

% Throughout the experimental setup, N.L. was instructed to handle each of the water bottles in about the same way, and to hold them about the same length of time. During the intention periods all bottles remained in their originally placed locations and were not disturbed. The third and fourth authors (M.E. and T.K.) knew in advance that there would be treated and distant control bottles in this study, but they were not informed about the existence of the proximal controls until after all distant intention treatments had ended.

在整个实验过程中，N.L.以大致相同的方法处理每个瓶子，并使这些瓶子的放置时间大致相同。在施加意念阶段，所有瓶子都放在各自的位置，没有其他的干扰。M.E和T.K.提前得知实验中会有实验组和远端对照组，但直到施加意念的阶段结束后，他们才得知实验中存在近端对照组。

% The comparison of principal interest in this study was the average (blindly rated) aesthetic differences of frozen water crystals obtained using the treated vs. proximal control samples. This is because those two conditions were located close to each other in the same environment, and because the proximal control was not influenced by M.E. or T.K.’s prior knowledge of its existence. That is, to take seriously the hypothesis that intention plays a role in this experiment, we felt it was necessary to constrain who knew about the potential targets of intentional influence. By analogy with a quantum optics system, in which the knowledge one has of the path that photons take through a double-slit apparatus influences the behavior of those photons, we speculated that knowledge of the experimental conditions in this test might influence what was ultimately measured. Thus, to provide some control over the distant intentions in this study we required a comparison condition that was unknown to M.E., to T.K., or to the groups of “distant intenders.” This was provided by the proximate control. The distant control was retained in this study primarily because we used a similar control in the previous study, so M.E. and T.K. would have expected it.

在本次研究中，我们主要关心的是实验组和近端对照组样本形成的水结晶照片的平均美学水平（通过盲评获得）差异。这是因为这两组放置在相同的环境中且距离较近，并且M.E.及T.K.都不知道近端对照组的存在，因而不会对其造成意念影响。也就是说，我们认为如果意念在实验中真起作用，则应限制知道意念影响潜在对象的人的数量。用量子光学系统来作比方，得知光子通过双缝装置的路径，这一事实已经影响了光子的行为。我们由此猜测，得知实验条件本身也可能会对实验结果造成影响。因此，为了研究实验中远程意念的效果，我们需要一个对照组，这个对照组M.E.和T.K.不知道，施加远程意念的人们也不知道。这一点由近端对照组体现。实验中还保留了远端实验组，这主要是因为在之前的实验中我们设置了这个（远端）对照组，因此M.E.和T.K.可能会猜测到它们会在这次实验中出现。

\subsection{意念施加}

% On May 20, 2006, in Graz, Austria, M.E. led a group of about a thousand people in a prayer of gratitude directed towards the water in the IONS laboratory, some 5,700 miles away. M.E. showed the audience where the IONS laboratory was located in relationship to Graz through a sequence of images from the Google Earth global mapping application. Then he showed the digital photo of the treatment bottles inside the shielded chamber with the words of an intentional “prayer for water” overlaid on the photo. After explaining the photo and purpose of the experiment, M.E. led the group in speaking aloud the words of the prayer for about five minutes. M.E. led a second group of 450 people in a similar exercise on May 23, 2006, from Nuremberg, Germany, and then a third group of 500 people from Munich, Germany on May 24, 2006.

2006年5月20日在奥地利格拉茨，M.E.带领约1000人为5700英里外IONS实验室中的水进行感恩祈祷。M.E.通过谷歌地图软件向人们展示了一系列照片，这些照片表明了IONS实验室与格拉茨的地理方位关系。接下来，他展示了电磁隔离房间内的实验组水瓶的数码照片，并把“用意念为水祈祷”的话覆盖在照片上。在解释完照片和实验目的后，M.E.带领人们大声念诵祈祷词（约五分钟）。2006年5月23日，M.E.在德国纽伦堡带领第二组450人进行了类似的祈祷；2006年5月24日，M.E.在德国慕尼黑带领第三组500人也进行了类似的祈祷。

% The day after the third group sent their intentions, N.L. retrieved all six bottles from the laboratory. Then she and D.R. (who remained blind to the bottles’conditions) wrapped the bottles in separate sheets of aluminum foil and placed all six bottles in a box. That package was placed inside a larger box, cushioned with foam peanuts, and mailed to M.E.’s laboratory in Tokyo. At this point D.R. informed M.E. and T.K. about the existence of the proximal controls. Like D.R., M.E. and T.K. remained blind to the conditions of the six bottles throughout the crystal formation and statistical analysis phases. N.L. was not involved in the study again until after all data had been collected and analyzed, whereupon she broke the blinding code.

在第三组人们施加意念后的第二天，N.L.在实验室内回收了全部六瓶水。在这之后，她和D.R.（他仍不清楚瓶子的处理条件）将这些瓶子用铝箔单独分开包装，并将它们放在一个盒子里，加上塑料泡沫颗粒作缓冲后放入更大的盒子，并邮寄到位于东京的M.E.的实验室。这时，D.R.才告知M.E.和T.K.近端对照组的存在。正如D.R.一样，M.E.和T.K.在水形成结晶和统计分析数据这两个实验步骤中一直不知道六瓶水的实验条件。在所有数据都经过收集和分析之后，N.L.才再次参与实验，并解封之前的信封。

\subsection{水结晶分析}

% Upon receiving the six bottles, T.K. blindly examined water samples from each bottle according to the following procedures:

收到六个瓶子之后，T.K.在不知道水样处理条件的情况下根据下列步骤检查每个瓶内的水样：

% 1) From each bottle, a drop (approximately 0.5 ml) of water was placed into each of 50 Petri dishes, and a lid identifying the bottle’s randomly assigned letter (A–F) was placed on each dish. Thus there were 50 water drops tested from each bottle.
% 2) Each dish was then placed on a tray in a random position in a freezer maintained at -25 to -30 degrees C for a minimum of three hours. The random placements helped to ensure that potential temperature differences within the freezer would be randomized among the dishes.
% 3) T.K. later removed the dishes from the freezer, and in a walk-in refrigerator (maintained at -5 degrees C）he took a photo of the apex of each resulting ice drop using a stereo optical microscope at either 1003 or 2003, depending on the presence and size of a crystal. Based on the results of the earlier experiment, some water drops were not expected to produce any discernable crystals.
% 4) All 300 resulting photographs, from all six bottles, were then emailed to D.R., each identified with a bottle assignment letter A–F, and a withinbottle sample number from 1 to 50.

\begin{enumerate}
\item 从每个瓶子中取出50滴水（每滴水约0.5ml），分别放置在50个培养皿中，并将贴有A-F标签\footnote{【译注】即与水滴对应瓶子的标签相同。}的盖子放在培养皿上。这样，每瓶水都有50个水滴的样本。
\item 将所有培养皿放在托盘上（摆放的位置是随机的）并放入冷冻柜内，保持-25℃到-30℃温度至少3个小时。这种随机放置的方法有助于保证冰箱中可能出现的温度差在培养皿中随机分布\footnote{【译注】即不同对照组之间受到温差影响的可能性是均等的。}。
\item T.K.将培养皿从冰箱中拿出，在小型冷藏室（保持在-5℃）中进行拍摄。他用立体光学显微镜了每个水滴结冰后的晶体顶端。拍摄放大率为$100\times$或$200\times$，这取决于晶体的出现位置和大小。之前的实验结果表明，有些水滴不会形成任何可辨认的结晶。
\item 所有六个瓶子中的所有样本的300张照片通过电子邮件发送给D.R.，每张照片标明了水瓶编号A-F和水滴样本编号1-50。
\end{enumerate}

\subsection{审美评价与分析}

\begin{figure}

\begin{minipage}[t]{0.59\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}
\captionsetup{width=.9\textwidth}
\caption{实验使用分层嵌套的方差分量分析对“意念假说”进行检验。意念处理条件为固定效应，每组不同的瓶子和每瓶不同的样本为随机效应。}
\label{fig1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.39\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig2.png}
\captionsetup{width=\textwidth}
\caption{水结晶照片示例，上面(a)为高对比度，下面(b)为低对比度。(a)中有一个水结晶形成，而(b)则没有。}
\label{fig2}
\end{minipage}

\end{figure}


% To provide blind, subjective assessments of the aesthetic beauty of the water crystals, D.R. created a website to allow individuals to judge each crystal photograph on two factors. The factor of principal interest was beauty, meaning that the picture was aesthetically pleasing in some way. A second, exploratory factor was interest, meaning that the picture was notable in some way. In both cases the rating choices ranged over a seven-point scale, from “not” to “very,” e.g. “not beautiful” to “very beautiful.” Each participating judge viewed and rated 50 photos, randomly selected out of the 300 available photos, and presented one at a time in a newly randomized order.

为了在不知情的情况下对水结晶作出主观的审美评价，D.R.建立了一个网站引导人们从两方面评判水结晶的审美评价。主要因素是“美”，即图片给人们带来美的感受。第二个探索性的因素是“兴趣”，即这张图片（由于某种原因）比较容易引起人们的注意。两种因素下的评分标准均分为七档，从“不”到“很”，如“不美”到“很美”。每个评分者对50张照片进行评分，这50张照片从300张照片中随机抽取，并以随机的次序一次一张的呈现\footnote{【译注】评分后才能看到下一张图片。}。

% We asked judges to rate both beauty and interest because prior research on aesthetic judgments, in realms ranging from fine art, to faces, to commercial product design, suggests that numerous factors influence aesthetic preference.（11） They include figural goodness, figure-ground contrast, stimulus repetition, symmetry, and prototypicality.（12） Such factors suggest that asking for a single rating of aesthetic beauty may not be sufficient to capture individuals’ full assessments of the photographs of frozen water. Whether the factor of interest was the best possible variable to use for this purpose was unknown, and was thus considered exploratory.

我们要求评分者从美观和兴趣两方面做出评价，因为之前一些关于审美判断（涉及美术、封面、商业产品设计等领域）的研究表明，众多因素共同影响人们的审美偏好\cite{Hekkert2003}。这些因素有：图像质量，图像背景对比度，重复刺激，对称性以及典型性\cite{Reber2004Processing}。这些因素表明，一个美观程度的评分不足以表述每个人看到水结晶的图像后的全部评价。兴趣这个因素在这种情况下是否是最好的因素，这一点我们无从得知，所以我们之前将这个因素称之为探索性因素。

% To test the hypothesis that the crystals in the intentional condition would be rated as more beautiful on average than the same crystals in the proximal control condition, a mixed, hierarchically nested variance components analysis of variance was employed（13）, where treatment condition was a fixed effect, and the two bottles used per condition and 50 crystals sampled per bottle were both random effects (see Figure 1).

为了验证“经过远距离意念作用的实验组的水结晶比近端对照组的水结晶平均审美得分更高”这一假设，我们采用了混合、分层嵌套的方差分量的方差分析\footnote{Statistica 7.0, StatSoft, Tulsa, OK, Variance components and mixed model ANOVA/ANCOVA analysis, in a hierarchically nested design.}，在这种分析方法中实验组条件为固定效应，每种条件下的两瓶水以及每个瓶子对应的50个结晶样品为随机效应（见图\ref{fig1}）。



%% \begin{figure}
%% \begin{center}
%% \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}
%% %The intentional hypothesis was tested using a hierarchically nested variance components analysis, with treatment condition as a fixed effect, and bottles within condition and samples within bottles as random effects.
%% %全部（40张）水结晶照片的平均得分。每张照片都有100次独立评分。每个评分者在不知道照片对应的水的处理条件的情况下对40张照片进行评分。图中虚线表示24张受试组照片和16张对照组照片的组内总平均分
%% \caption[width=.6\columnwidth]{使用分层嵌套的方差分量分析对“意念假说”进行检验，意念处理条件为固定效应，每组不同的瓶子和每瓶不同的样本为随机效应}

%% \end{center}
%% \end{figure}


\subsection{图像对比分析}

%结晶照片评分对比

% In addition to the subjective assessments, we also used image processing software (Matlab 7.0.1 Image Processing Toolbox, The Mathworks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts) to generate an objective score of image “contrast” for each of the 300 photographs. Contrast in this context refers to the proportion of black vs. white in an image. This was a useful metric because when crystals appear on the apex of frozen water drops, they tend to rise up beyond the surface of the drop, partially because ice expands when it freezes and also because water crystals grow out like branches on a tree. When a microphotograph is taken of such crystals, the narrow field of focus tends to separate the white-appearing crystal from the darker background, thus increasing the image’s overall contrast. When no crystal is present, the surface is flatter and the image has a more uniformly gray appearance (see Figure 2). We predicted that these contrast values would be correlated with the average ratings of aesthetic beauty, and thus that contrast in the treatment condition would be higher than in the proximal control condition.

除了主观评价，我们也运用了图像处理软件（Matlab 7.0.1 图像处理工具箱，MathWorks公司，Natick，马萨诸塞州）来处理300张图象得出图象“对比度”的客观得分。在这里，“对比度”指的是一张图片中黑与白的比例。这是一个有用的指标，因为当水结晶在水滴冷冻形成的冰晶顶端出现时，它们往往向上生长并超出了水滴的表面，这是由于水结冰时体积膨胀，也是因为水结晶会像树枝一样向上生长分叉。当照下这些晶体的显微照片时，狭窄的焦点视野使看起来呈白色的水结晶从暗淡的背景中分离出来。当没有晶体存在于视野中时，背景表面平坦，图象具有更均匀的灰度（见图\ref{fig2}）。我们预测这些对比度的值与美学水平的平均得分相关，因此实验组的图象对比度将会比近端对照组的图像对比度要高。

%% \begin{figure}
%% \begin{center}
%% \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig1and2.png} %
%% %Example of images with high (top [a]) and low (bottom [b]) contrast. The left image shows a crystal formation, the right does not.
%% \caption[width=.9\textwidth]{水结晶照片示例，(a)为高对比度，(b)为低对比度。左侧的图像中有一个水结晶形成，而右边则没有}
%% \label{fig2}
%% \end{center}
%% \end{figure}

\section{结果}

\subsection{晶体分析}
% Subjective assessment ratings were collected online for one month. During that time, 2,579 people had each assessed 50 randomly selected images, for a total of 128,950 assessments and an average of 430 beauty and interest ratings for each of the 300 images. These average ratings, in the form of point values, formed the dependent variables in the subsequent analyses. Assessment data from individuals who started to evaluate images but stopped before finishing all 50 were excluded from further analysis.

在一个月的时间里，人们通过互联网提交主观评分。在此期间，2579人各评价了50张随机选出的图像，即共128950个评价得分，每张图片平均得到了430份评分。这些得分的平均分作为独立变量供后续分析。那些没有评价满50张图片的人，他们的评分全部被排除在外，不做进一步分析。

% Figure 3 shows the average assessments and 95% confidence intervals for average ratings of aesthetic beauty for each image. Images 1–100 correspond to the distant control condition, 101–200 to the proximal control condition, and 201–300 to the treated condition. The grand average rating for beauty was 1.77 (on a scale of 0–6), thus most of the images were not regarded as particularly beautiful. Of the 300 images, 270 obtained average beauty ratings greater than 1.0. This subset of images was examined in a secondary analysis because it was more likely to contain crystalline shapes, which was of main interest in this experiment. That is, the intentional hypothesis was not that more crystals would form due to intention, but rather that crystals that did form would appear to be more beautiful in the treatment condition vs. the proximal control condition.

图\ref{fig3}展示了每张图片的美学评分的平均值与95\%的置信区间。图象1-100对应远端对照组，101-200对应近端对照组，201-300对应实验控制组。总体的平均审美得分为1.77（分数范围为0-6），因此绝大多数图象都没有被视为美的图像。在300张图片中，有270张得分在1.0以上。针对这部分得分，我们进行了二次分析，因为这些图片中更可能包含水结晶的形状，而这点是我们在整个实验过程中主要关注的一点。也就是说，意念假设不是指通过意念可以使水结晶的形成率更高，而是指实验组的水结晶图象的美学评价比近端对照组更高。

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig3.png} %
%Average ratings of aesthetic beauty for all 300 images, with 95% confidence intervals.
\caption[width=.9\textwidth]{全部300张图像的美学平均得分，及其95\%的置信区间。}
\label{fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

% The grand average rating for interest was 2.51. The correlation between average ratings of beauty vs. interest was highly positive (r=0.86, t=29.1, N=300, p nearly equal 0). The correlation between beauty and normalized image contrast was also positive (r = 0.30, t = 5.35, N = 300, p = 0.000000897).(14)

“兴趣”因素的总平均分为2.51。美学与兴趣的评分呈高度相关（$r=0.86, t=29.1, N=300, p\approx 0$）。美学评分与归一化后图形的对比度\footnote{归一化的对比度值通过$z=(c-m)/s$计算，其中$c$是给定图像的原始对比度，$m$是所有原始对比度的均值，$s$是所有原始对比度的标准差。}也具有相关性($r=0.30, t=5.35, N=300, p=8.97\times 10^{-8}$)。
%Normalized contrast values were formed as $z=(c-m)/s$, where c was the raw contrast value for a given image, m was the mean of all raw contrast values, and s the standard deviation of all raw contrast values.
\subsection{分析1：美学}

% The treatment condition resulted in a significant, albeit weak main effect (p=0.03; Table 1; Figure 4). When interest was used as a covariate of beauty, the main effect for condition was no longer significant (F[2,293] = 3.03, p = 0.20). The latter is not too surprising given the strong correlation between beauty and interest variables. For the subset of 270 trials with beauty > 1.0, the results remained significant (p = 0.04; Table 2; Figure 4).

实验组条件导致显著而微弱的主效应($p=0.03$；见表\ref{table1}和图\ref{fig4})。当我们把兴趣当做美学的协变量时，条件不同导致的主效应不再显著($F[2,293]=3.03, p=0.20$)。后者并不奇怪，因为美学和兴趣两个因素之间具有很强的关联。对于270个美学得分大于1的样本，试验结果仍为显著($p=0.04$；见表\ref{table2}和图\ref{fig4})。

\begin{table}[t]
\caption{所有样本评分的分层嵌套的方差分量分析，其中“美学评价”作为独立的度量。}
\centering
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{m{.25\textwidth}RRRRR}
\hline\hline
& 效应 & 自由度 & MS & F & p\\
\hline
意念条件 & 固定 & 2 & 2.13 & 13.09 & 0.03\\
不同瓶子条件 & 随机 & 3 & 0.16 & 0.23 & 0.87\\
同一瓶不同水样条件 & 随机 & 294 & 0.69 & &\\
\hline
\end{tabularx}
\label{table1}
\end{table}

\begin{table}[t]
\caption{所有美学评分>1的样本的分层嵌套的方差分量分析}
\centering
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{m{.25\textwidth}RRRRR}
\hline\hline
& 效应 & 自由度 & MS & F & p\\
\hline
意念条件 & 固定 & 2 & 2.12 & 11.49 & 0.04\\
不同瓶子条件 & 随机 & 3 & 0.19 & 0.28 & 0.84\\
同一瓶不同水样条件 & 随机 & 264 & 0.66 & &\\
\hline
\end{tabularx}
\label{table2}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[p]
\captionsetup{width=.45\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig4.png}
\caption{\textbf{美观程度}\ 全部300张图片（黑色）以及美观平均分大于1.0的部分图片（灰色，270张）的带一个标准差的平均美学得分情况。从左至右依次为远端对照组，实验组，近端对照组。}
\label{fig4}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.495\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig5.png}
\caption{\textbf{图像对比度}\ 全部300张图片（黑色）以及美观平均分大于1.0的部分图片（灰色，270张）的带一个标准差的平均归一化图像对比度得分情况。从左至右依次为远端对照组，实验组，近端对照组。}
\label{fig5}
\end{minipage}

\end{figure}



%% \begin{figure}
%% \begin{center}
%% \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig4.png} %
%% %Average ratings of aesthetic beauty for all 300 images, and for the subset of 270 images where average rating for beauty . 1.0, with one standard error bars.
%% \caption[width=.9\textwidth]{全部300张图片以及美观平均分大于1.0的部分图片（270张）的带一个标准差的平均美学得分情况。}
%% \label{fig4}
%% \end{center}
%% \end{figure}

% The pairwise comparison of principal interest—treated vs. proximal controls—supported the intentional hypothesis for all trials (t[198] = 1.67, p=0.05, one-tailed). The same comparison was somewhat stronger for the subset of trials where beauty > 1 (t[168]=2.32, p=0.01, one-tailed). The distant control condition resulted in slightly more beautiful crystals than the intentional condition when considering all trials (t[198] = 0.77), and slightly less beautiful for the subset where beauty > 1 (t[168] =-0.14).

实验组和近端对照组关于兴趣因素的比较结果支持意念假说（全部样本）($t[198]=1.67, p=0.05$，单尾检验）。在美学评分大于1的样本中，这两组比较的试验结果更加显著 ($t[168]=2.32, p=0.01$，单尾检验)。当考虑所有样本时，远端对照组比实验组的结晶评分稍微高一些($t[198]=0.77$)，而在美学评分大于1的样本中远端对照组比实验组的结晶形状评分稍微低一些($t[168]=-0.14$)。

\subsection{分析2：图像对比度}

% Normalized image contrast scores resulted in a nonsignificant main effect across the three conditions for all trials (p = 0.25; Tables 3 & 4; Figure 5), but a pairwise comparison between the treated vs. proximal controls showed suggestive effects for both all trials, t(198)=1.85 (p=0.03, one-tailed), and for the subset of trials where beauty > 1, t(168) = 1.55 (p = 0.06, one-tailed). The distant control comparisons were nearly identical to the proximal controls.

从全部样本的情况看，归一化图像对比度得分在三种不同条件\footnote{\label{footA}【译注】条件1：是否施加意念；条件2：同一组的不同水瓶；条件三：同一水瓶的不同样本}中的主效应均不显著($p=0.25$；见表\ref{table3}、表\ref{table4}和图\ref{fig5})，但实验组和近端对照组的对比（所有样本）显示可能存在这种效应，$t(198)=1.85$  ($p=0.03$，单尾检验)，且对于美学评分大于1的样本，上述结果为$t(168)=1.55$ ($p=0.06$，单尾检验)。远端对照组与近端对照组的对比中图像对比度的效应近乎完全相同。

\begin{table}[t]
%% \renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
\caption{所有样本评分的分层嵌套的方差分量分析，使用归一化后的图像对比度作为独立变量}
\centering
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{m{.25\textwidth}RRRRR}
%% \begin{tabular}[width=\columnwidth]{llrrrr}
\hline\hline
& 效应 & 自由度 & MS & F & p\\
\hline
意念条件 & 固定 & 2 & 2.59 & 2.24 & 0.25\\
不同瓶子条件 & 随机 & 3 & 1.16 & 1.17 & 0.32\\
同一瓶不同水样条件 & 随机 & 294 & 0.99 & &\\
\hline
\end{tabularx}
\label{table3}
\end{table}

\begin{table}[t]
%% \renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
\caption{所有美学评分>1的样本的分层嵌套的方差分量分析，使用归一化的图像对比度作为独立变量}
\centering
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{m{.25\textwidth}RRRRR}
%% \begin{tabular}[width=\columnwidth]{llrrrr}
\hline\hline
& 效应 & 自由度 & MS & F & p\\
\hline
意念条件 & 固定 & 2 & 2.04 & 1.33 & 0.39\\
不同瓶子条件 & 随机 & 3 & 1.54 & 1.65 & 0.18\\
同一瓶不同水样条件 & 随机 & 264 & 0.94 & &\\
\hline
\end{tabularx}
\label{table4}
\end{table}

%% \begin{figure}
%% \begin{center}
%% \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig5.png} %
%% %Average normalized values for contrast for all 300 images, and for the subset of 270 images where average rating for beauty . 1.0, with one standard error bars.
%% \caption[width=.9\textwidth]{全部300张图片以及美观平均分大于1.0的部分图片（270张）的带一个标准差的平均归一化图像对比度得分情况。}
%% \label{fig5}
%% \end{center}
%% \end{figure}

\section{讨论}

% This experiment found a modestly significant difference (p = 0.03) in blind ratings of subjective aesthetic beauty of crystals formed from water samples “exposed” to distant intentions vs. proximal and distant control samples. The comparison of main interest confirmed, weakly, that the treated water crystals were rated as more beautiful, on average, than the proximal controls (p = 0.05, one-tailed). A similar analysis using objective ratings of image contrast was not significant when comparing across the three conditions, but a planned comparison between the treated and proximal controls again showed a modest difference in favor of the intentional hypothesis (p = 0.03).

实验结果表明，实验组的水结晶美学上的盲评得分和近/远端对照组的盲评得分存在着一定的显著差异($p=0.03$)。对于该实验重点关注的实验组与近端对照组的对比情况，评分数据证实了实验组水结晶的平均美学得分比近端对照组的得分稍高($p=0.05$，单尾检验)。而以客观的图像对比度为依据进行的类似分析表明三种不同条件\footnote{同【译注】\ref{footA}}下的水结晶图像对比度无显著差异。但如果仅对比实验组和近端对照组的图像对比度，则存在着一定的差异，从而支持意念假说($p=0.03$)。

% It should be noted that the distant controls were judged as being slightly (nonsignificantly) more beautiful than the treated samples when considering all trials, but nevertheless for the comparison of main interest (treated vs. proximal controls) the difference was in alignment with the previously reported pilot test. The present experiment extended the earlier test design by including five new features to address potential alternative explanations. They included (a) using a proximal control condition to eliminate environmental differences between the treated and control samples, (b) placing Petri dishes in random positions in the deep freezer to average out any systematic temperature differences in the freezer, (c) employing a triple-blind design to control for expectation biases on the part of the photographer, judges, and data analyst, (d) including image processing to objectively characterize the images, and (e) analyzing all images rather than just those judged by the photographer to contain crystals.

但应注意的是，在对全体样本数据进行分析时，远端对照组的水结晶比实验组的更漂亮（不显著）。然而在实验组和近端对照组的对比（这也是本实验主要的关注点）中，这种差异与之前做过的双盲实验大致相同。本实验在以前的实验基础上扩展引入了5个新的因素排除潜在的其他解释。具体包括：（a）用近端对照组以消除实验组和两个对照组之间的环境差异；（b）将培养皿随机放在冰柜中，以使冰柜中温度不均匀的系统误差得以平均化；（c）使用三盲实验设计，避免了实验参与者（摄像人员、评分人员和数据分析人员）对实验的主管预期造成的干扰；（d）引入图象处理步骤，以客观评价图象；（e）分析所有图片，而不仅是摄像者认为出现结晶的那部分图片。

% These design elements excluded obvious environmental differences and conventional subjective biases as plausible explanations for the observed results, and the combined results of the two experiments appear to exclude chance as an explanation (unweighted Stouffer Z=3.34, p=0.0004). At first blush this seems to imply that distant intention influenced water crystallization properties in accordance with the hypothesis. However, as in any experiment involving intention, the intentions of the investigators cannot be cleanly isolated from those of the nominal participants and this in turn constrains how one should properly interpret the results.

这些设计元素排除了明显的环境差异和研究人员对观察结果进行主观解释的常见误差，而这两次实验的结果共同排除了随机性这个解释（未加权的$Stouffer Z=3.34, p=0.0004$)。这似乎表明远程意念可以影响水结晶的属性（与假设一致）。然而，正如任何包含意念的实验可能遇到的问题一样，研究人员的意念无法被单独从所有参与者的意念中独立出来进行分析，这一点反过来制约了我们如何合理地解释实验结果。 %乍一看

% In addition, there were many uncontrolled degrees of freedom in this experiment which may have allowed “unintended intentional” effects to creep in. They all involve human decisions, e.g. selecting six specific bottles of water from a huge population of available bottles, randomly assigning those bottles to three conditions, selecting and preparing the water drops, placing the water drop samples inside the freezer, searching for and photographing ice crystals on the frozen water drops at different magnification levels, choosing one of a large possible set of image processing algorithms to provide an objective measure of image contrast, and so on. The challenge for future tests of this kind is to find ways of reducing these degrees of freedom without imposing such severe constraints on the design that the effect of interest is either quenched out of existence, or that the experiment becomes so expensive to conduct that it doesn’t take place at all.

除此之外，这个实验中还存在很多不可控的自由度，它们可能导致实验受到“意想不到的意念”的影响。它们都与人的选择相关，例如，从所有瓶子中选出六个瓶子\footnote{【译注】指在超市购买纯净水的行为。}，将六个瓶子随机分为3组，选择与制备水滴，将水滴放入冰柜，用不同的放大级别寻找和拍摄冰粒融化时产生的水结晶，在繁多的图像对比度算法中选择一个客观的算法，等等。以后的类似实验所受到的挑战是，找到限制这些自由度的方法，使得对这些因素的限制既不会阻止实验结果的出现，也不会使得实验代价过于昂贵以至于无法进行实验。

\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\bibliography{reference}

%% \appendix
%% \section{致谢}
%% 感谢潘聪同学对本文的翻译（2014年1月）

\end{document}
